Jumped the Gun re: Cancel Watch
serene_rebel
succumbed to the zie/zir protocol. So much easier than writing
his/her/he/she throughout. *grin*]
I ranted about Cancel Watch before I got a few emails from zir
explaining why my stuff was bouncing and multiple-posting. Zie
has offered to stop posting the notices here, but I didn't want to
speak for the group, being a new member and really not opposed to
the service zie is doing.
Sorry for posting without being in possession of all the facts. I
was just in a picayune mood.
serene
--
The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to
hold two opposed ideas at the same time, and still
retain the ability to function. -- F. Scott Fitzgerald
~~~ http://members.tripod.com/~serene_rebel ~~~
Straycowboy
such an immature child, as the cancelee...........What she can't do is erase
the posts from my server, who also archives them.....
Stewart
Who always wondered why his server also archived things, now he knows....
Adam C. Wick
> succumbed to the zie/zir protocol. So much easier than writing
> his/her/he/she throughout. *grin*]
Allright, for those of us who've browsed a.p but are
not really members, how does zie/zir decline? =) Is
it basically:
(Nom) Zie caught the ball.
(Gen) Zie's ball was red.
(Abl) Ann was given the ball by zir.
(Acc) Ann kissed zir
(Dat) I gave the ball to zir.
Adam, syntax freak
Robin Lee Powell
>[Note to any alt.poly-ites who might be reading this: I finally
>succumbed to the zie/zir protocol. So much easier than writing
>his/her/he/she throughout. *grin*]
I _vastly_ prefer the 'ey' series. Produce the neuter singular by
chopping the th off the plural in all forms. Simple, easy to learn, no
questions about syntax, derived from _English_.
Also, when you use it, people just sort of read it in a way that makes
sense; I've never had anyone ask me, "What the hell is ey?" the way
people always do with zie/zir.
-Robin
--
My Home Page (Too Much Information!):http://www.csclub.uwaterloo.ca/~rlpowell/
"Government is not suggestion nor persuasion, it is force. When you advocate
any government action, you first must believe that violence is the best answer
to the question at hand." -- Laws of the Jungle, by Allen Thornton
Jozhi
>not really members, how does zie/zir decline? =) Is
>it basically:
>
>(Nom) Zie caught the ball.
>(Gen) Zie's ball was red.
>(Abl) Ann was given the ball by zir.
>(Acc) Ann kissed zir
>(Dat) I gave the ball to zir.
wh wh what? my head is spinning.
-------
jozhi, victory over horseshit in 2000!
Join the Revolution today.
serene_rebel
"Adam C. Wick" wrote:
> Allright, for those of us who've browsed a.p but are
> not really members, how does zie/zir decline? =) Is
> it basically:
>
> (Nom) Zie caught the ball.
> (Gen) Zie's ball was red.
Zir ball was red.
> (Abl) Ann was given the ball by zir.
> (Acc) Ann kissed zir
> (Dat) I gave the ball to zir.
>
> Adam, syntax freak
serene, grammar maven (*grin*) who is sitting here eating
cantaloupe and sunflower sprouts with french dressing on them and
wondering when exactly she lost her mind.
Jeffrey William McKeough
Jeffrey William McKeough <san...@spdcc.com> wrote:
>In article <dmp90bx...@marilyn.cs.indiana.edu>,
>>(Acc) Ann kissed zir
>>(Dat) I gave the ball to zir.
>>
>>
>>Adam, syntax freak
>
>add these monstrosities to nonproductive categories.
Or maybe it's a single nonproductive category. Something like that.
--
Jeffrey William McKeough san...@spdcc.com
"This is the sort of discussion one should
choreograph and have on a bus." -Dino
Jeffrey William McKeough
Adam C. Wick <aw...@acm.org> wrote:
>(Nom) Zie caught the ball.
>(Gen) Zie's ball was red.
>(Abl) Ann was given the ball by zir.
>(Acc) Ann kissed zir
>(Dat) I gave the ball to zir.
>
>
>Adam, syntax freak
Then I won't need to point out to you that people are attempting to
add these monstrosities to nonproductive categories.
--
Cameron
san...@spdcc.com (Jeffrey William McKeough) wrote:
> >Adam, syntax freak
Uh, hey, Adam, "SF". I'm just jumping right in here, if U don't mind.
Is "Zir" and "Zie" the official gender neutral terms?? I've been using "hir"
and "sie", mainly 'cuz I found them in Leslie Feinberg's book, "Trans
Liberation: Beyond Pink or Blue". BUT, before I get too confused and start
peppering my speech with one or the other, I'd be interested to know which is
more acceptable...
On that note (ding!!), how does one PRONOUNCE zie and zir??
many tanks!! >:)
---Cammie
--
"Even at the very bottom of the river, I didn't think to myself, `is
this a hearty joke or the merest accident'. I just thought, `it's wet'."
---Eeyore
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
Jeffrey William McKeough
According to www.iso.ch, the standard is only in the Committee stage,
so no.
>On that note (ding!!), how does one PRONOUNCE zie and zir??
"They".
Happy to help.
Adam C. Wick
> > (Nom) Zie caught the ball.
> > (Gen) Zie's ball was red.
>
> Zir ball was red.
Ah. Thank you.
> serene, grammar maven (*grin*) who is sitting here eating
> cantaloupe and sunflower sprouts with french dressing on them and
> wondering when exactly she lost her mind.
Its been sighted in Northwest Florida. I believe it was
playing poker with my sex life.
Adam
Adam C. Wick
Personally, I pronounce them with an outrageous french accent.
But that could just be me.
Adam
Cameron
rlpo...@calum.csclub.uwaterloo.ca (Robin Lee Powell) wrote:
> I _vastly_ prefer the 'ey' series. Produce the neuter singular by
> chopping the th off the plural in all forms. [snip] "What the hell is ey?"
the way people always do with zie/zir.
OK, pass me the dummy hat. Thanx.
NOW!! can I assume that the "ey" forms are use throughout?? Like "ey" for
his and hers and he and she?? I have this sinking feeling I'm missing
something-- cuz 'bout a year or so ago, *I* would certainly have said, "what
the hell is 'ey'?", esp. if it was used in a gender specific way referring to
one individual like: "did you see ey's bike??". I might not have done that
with zie/zir.
This, in turn, makes me feel like I'm missing something fundamental about this
whole discussion of the 'ey' woids.
---Camm
Cameron
san...@spdcc.com (Jeffrey William McKeough) wrote:
> >On that note (ding!!), how does one PRONOUNCE zie and zir??
>
> "They".
OK, but what about in the singular-- the gender neutral/inclusive term for he
or she or his or her?? In SPOKEN English it would sound like, "Hey!! Did
you see Cam's new car?? They got it from the new dealer in XYZ..." In this
case, it sounds more like BEV or just plain wrong grammar (depending on the
individual hearing it).
Besides, I personally am an educator, I'd like to expose my students,
parenthetically, to gender inclusive pronouns, but if it's pronounced like
"they", thats gonna confuse the hell outta' em...
AND, while we're on the topic, what 'bout using part of the person's name as
the pronoun?? Has that been rejected?? For example, Leslie Feinberg, who
prefers "sie" and "hir" could be refered to as "Lesself" or just plain "Les."
Another example in spoken context: "Did you see the renivation Cam did to
Cam's bathroom?? Cam did it Camself!!"
I know it's clunky as hell, but is it considered gauche to speak in that way
(I've found it easier, sometimes, to talk 'bout bi-gendered folk 'cuz I don't
have to stop and think 'bout the right word to insert instead of s/he).
AND, for those folks who think we must be outta our mind to even care 'bout
this stuff, I appreciate those folks who are keeping this thread going to
actually forge a new, gender-inclusive set of pronouns!!
---Cameron (Cam, C, Camm, Cammie, Ronnie, Ron, Ronn, sie, hir, it...)
Jozhi
Susan Davis
CH == Consortio Helvitiae (sp? case?) == Switzerland
--
Susan Davis <s...@secant.com>
Secant Technologies * 4853 Galaxy Pkwy, Ste. S * Cleveland, OH 44128
serene_rebel
"Adam C. Wick" wrote:
>
> serene_rebel <serene...@usa.net> writes:
>
> > > (Nom) Zie caught the ball.
> > > (Gen) Zie's ball was red.
> >
> > Zir ball was red.
>
> Ah. Thank you.
*smile* No problem, though I'm no expert, except for being a
particularly interested observer of its declension on alt.poly and soc.singles.moderated.
>
> > serene, grammar maven (*grin*) who is sitting here eating
> > cantaloupe and sunflower sprouts with french dressing on them and
> > wondering when exactly she lost her mind.
>
> Its been sighted in Northwest Florida. I believe it was
> playing poker with my sex life.
Cool. My mind and your sex life are in Florida? What shall your
mind and my sex life do for fun while they're gone?
>
> Adam
serene
serene_rebel
"Adam C. Wick" wrote:
>
> > On that note (ding!!), how does one PRONOUNCE zie and zir??
>
> Personally, I pronounce them with an outrageous french accent.
> But that could just be me.
LOL, alt.poly-ites seem to say it's "zee" for zie and "zeer" or
"zir" (rhymes with "her") for zir, for the most part, although the
arguments for and against the use of zie/zir and the arguments
about their pronunciation rage on and off over there. ssm seems
to be at peace about it. *smile* There are other forms of
gender-neutral pronouns in use over there, too, (e.g. sie/hir)
which is one reason I don't think it'll really catch on too
quickly. We shall see.
>
> Adam
Jeffrey William McKeough
Cameron <pax...@my-dejanews.com> wrote:
>
>Besides, I personally am an educator, I'd like to expose my students,
>parenthetically, to gender inclusive pronouns, but if it's pronounced like
>"they", thats gonna confuse the hell outta' em...
1) It's not possible to add new pronouns to English. It's not
possible to travel faster than light. The universe isn't
particularly sorry if either of those things bothers you.
2) Last I checked, "he" and "she" were each inclusive of a gender.
3) These silly attempts to talk at warp speed would be no less
impossible but scads less icky if people would try for euphony in
their design efforts.
4) I find it blindingly irresponsible for an educator to toy with the
fundaments of a child's language development to suit his or her
(heh-heh) quixotic goal of putting gender equity where it simply
can't be put. I hope you teach adults who can simply roll their
eyes at you.
Jozhi
what's the fuss over zie/zir anyway? who cares if you use a gender specific
word? how many people actually get all that worked up if you call them by the
wrong gender? i'm thinking most people would correct you and then move on.
and as for writing, put his xor her and move on.
-jozhi, shrugging her shoulders (i thought jozhi was a guy?)
Kay Dekker
> 1) It's not possible to add new pronouns to English. It's not
> possible to travel faster than light. The universe isn't
> particularly sorry if either of those things bothers you.
It's not possible to travel faster than light? Well, it's
certainly not possible to travel _at_ c unless your rest mass
is zero, as it it for photons, for otherwise your mass
becomes infinite at c (division by (c-v) when c=v, I
believe). Whether or not it's possible to travel _strictly
faster_ than c (ie, velocity always greater than c) depends
on whether the universe has a problem with imaginary mass
values, which is as yet unknown. Given that such hypotheticals
would travel _backwards_ in time, should that be "has not yet
become unknown", from their viewpoint?
As to whether "it's not possible to add new pronouns to
English": that depends, as C E M Joad would have said, on
what you mean by "possible", "new pronoun" and "English".
What do we mean by "English"? Are Anglo-Saxon or Middle English
"English" by your definition? Diachronically, English
pronouns have varied quite a lot. Even synchronically,
usage variations between, say, Mercian, Northumbrian and
West Saxon were quite profound. Certainly pronominal
forms have been lost from English, in the sense that the case
structure has simplified greatly over time.
Or are you simply saying that an English which has,
so to say, had its axioms changed is "not English"? in that
case, hm. What of the tense structures in Black American
English? Certainly they lead to productions that are
erroneous by the standards of Standard English, but are
clearly meaningful (and useful) to the language community
that uses them. And are they "not English"?
> 2) Last I checked, "he" and "she" were each inclusive of a gender.
The meaning of this escapes me, I fear. Will you elaborate?
> 3) These silly attempts to talk at warp speed would be no less
> impossible but scads less icky if people would try for euphony in
> their design efforts.
Euphony. Now there's a hard notion. Which is the more euphonious:
"gristle" or "poltroon"? How did you decide? And how many others
would agree with you? And why?
> 4) I find it blindingly irresponsible for an educator to toy with the
> fundaments of a child's language development to suit his or her
> (heh-heh) quixotic goal of putting gender equity where it simply
> can't be put. I hope you teach adults who can simply roll their
> eyes at you.
And may the ghost of Sister Immaculata catch me a whack across
my knuckles with her ruler if I ever use a preposition to end
a sentence with. Prescription in language, as with most other
things, is pissing into the wind. What suits and works, persists;
what doesn't, doesn't. Read Jonathan Swift inveighing against
dreadful new words like "mob", whisper "O tempora, o mores",
and pass on. There's little, if anything you, I, or the innovators
can do to determine whether or not their newfangled notions will
be the common idioms of tomorrow.
Kay
--
OK, so maybe I have a few megalomaniacal tendencies.
Is that so wrong? =) -- Adam Cogen Wick
Geezer
> Personally, I pronounce them with an outrageous french accent.
> But that could just be me.
Zat's fantastique! Va-va-va-voom!
intrigued by the sounds,
Geezer giza at selin dot com
serene_rebel
Kay Dekker wrote:
>
>
> It's not possible to travel faster than light? Well, it's
> certainly not possible to travel _at_ c unless your rest mass
> is zero, <snipped some cool physics stuff>
>
> As to whether "it's not possible to add new pronouns to
> English": that depends, as C E M Joad would have said, on
> what you mean by "possible", "new pronoun" and "English".
> What do we mean by "English"? Are Anglo-Saxon or Middle English
> "English" by your definition? Diachronically, English
> pronouns have varied quite a lot. Even synchronically,
> usage variations between, say, Mercian, Northumbrian and
> West Saxon were quite profound. Certainly pronominal
> forms have been lost from English, in the sense that the case
> structure has simplified greatly over time.
>
> Or are you simply saying that an English which has,
> so to say, had its axioms changed is "not English"? in that
> case, hm. What of the tense structures in Black American
> English? Certainly they lead to productions that are
> erroneous by the standards of Standard English, but are
> clearly meaningful (and useful) to the language community
> that uses them. And are they "not English"?
*swoon* English as a living language--gotta love it.
>
> And may the ghost of Sister Immaculata catch me a whack across
> my knuckles with her ruler if I ever use a preposition to end
> a sentence with. Prescription in language, as with most other
> things, is pissing into the wind. What suits and works, persists;
> what doesn't, doesn't. Read Jonathan Swift inveighing against
> dreadful new words like "mob", whisper "O tempora, o mores",
> and pass on. There's little, if anything you, I, or the innovators
> can do to determine whether or not their newfangled notions will
> be the common idioms of tomorrow.
>
Are we allowed to co-opt another NG's *swoon* twice in one
message? Hope so. *thud* (My other current favorite is
soc.singles.mod's "Marry me?" *grin*)
> Kay
> --
> OK, so maybe I have a few megalomaniacal tendencies.
> Is that so wrong? =) -- Adam Cogen Wick
serene
Cameron
san...@spdcc.com (Jeffrey William McKeough) wrote:
> 1) It's not possible to add new pronouns to English.
rubbish. We can do anything we ruddy well LIKE in English (and other
languages), that's the wonderful thing about it. We can add whatever we
like. If 10 million people started using the word "glub" or "whammi" to mean
gender neutral reference to a person in place of the proper noun, guess
what?? IT'S A PRONOUN!! Think of slang which is constantly coming into the
language and being documented into dictionaries. These words are certainly
not impossible to add to the language. It's more likely that we typically DO
NOT CHOOSE to add pronouns to the language. To say that it's IMPOSSIBLE is
just foolish. It may not be widely accepted, it may never make it into the
APA or MLA style manual, but to say it's impossible... HA!
> 2) Last I checked, "he" and "she" were each inclusive of a gender.
Yes, thank you Pogo. *A* gender. The whole point of gender
neutral/inclusive pronouns is to either NOT indicate a gender or INCLUDE ALL
genders into it (next thing you'll tell me is that there's only two
genders...)
I've snipped 3 because it's not worth responding to something that makes so
little sense.
> 4) I find it blindingly irresponsible for an educator to toy
[snip]
yes yes yes, thank you, Pogo. AS a educator, I find it blindingly
irresponsible to just merrily go along with the status quo of ANY traditon
without seeing if it's A) sensible and B) inclusive. This is 1999. Let's
get with the program and finally realize that there are other people out
there who are not x-actly like you who deserve respect, attention and, where
necessary or requested, their own bloody pronouns.
---Cameron
Cameron
jo...@aol.commentator (Jozhi) wrote:
> what's the fuss over zie/zir anyway? who cares if you use a gender specific
> word?
I cant speak for everyone, but for starters, I don't like to use male
pronouns for everything when you're not sure what else to use. HE, HIS or
HIM is kind of the English default setting in our language. We speak of
"mankind", "fireMAN", "postMAN" or even "snowMAN". We refer to a bunch of
folk, mixed sex, male or even a gaggle of women as "guys". Do you have
children?? babies are almost ALWAYS assumed to be male, unless they're
dressed up in some sort of frilly pink sequinted thingie, or-- feh!!-- have
one of those obnoxious headbands on (I swear, THAT'S what they were invented
for-- a little billboard to the world: MY CHILD IS A BIO-FEMME, THANK YOU!!
Some folk, myself included, don't like that and find it unfair.
However, I think it's coming more into the language (certainly mine) as more
and more people find that gender isn't as pink and blue as we expect it to
be. Transgendered, transsexual, bi-gendered, gender-blending, non-operative
trans folk sometimes live in a gray zone that the language doesn't reflect,
and that can get on yer nerves.
Let's assume that you're a female (of which there's many different
varieties-- simply having XX genes or a vagina does NOT necess. make you a
woman!!) Let's further assume you were a bit "butch". How would you feel
"just correcting" everyone who called you Sir or Mr?? "Thank you, sir..." in
the grocery store at the checkout. "Can I help you, sir?" at the fast food
counter. If you don't really FEEL like a "sir", "Mr", he/him, it can REALLY
get on yer nerves!!
If you don't KNOW any trans/bi/blending folk, then I can understand why you
would wonder who would even CARE. Still, it's out there (THEY'RE out there),
and I think it's high time we all got fair about our language.
> (i thought jozhi was a guy?)
Well, why do you think I go by Cameron?? Or Cammy. Or Cam. Or Ronnie. Or
Ron. Or C. Or Camm. Or Ronn.....
Jozhi
LOL is that a language on it's own?
>Standard English
LOL
>Which is the more euphonious:
>"gristle" or "poltroon"?
certainly not zie/zir!
Robin Lee Powell
>In article <92394514...@watserv5.uwaterloo.ca>,
> rlpo...@calum.csclub.uwaterloo.ca (Robin Lee Powell) wrote:
>
>> I _vastly_ prefer the 'ey' series. Produce the neuter singular by
>> chopping the th off the plural in all forms. [snip] "What the hell is ey?"
>the way people always do with zie/zir.
>
>OK, pass me the dummy hat. Thanx.
>
>NOW!! can I assume that the "ey" forms are use throughout?? Like "ey" for
>his and hers and he and she??
No. Chop off the th for all forms, so he, she, ey, they; his, her,
eir, their; himself, herself, emself, themselves (OK, that's a bit
different, but makes sense); also em and eirs.
there might be one more.
>I have this sinking feeling I'm missing
>something-- cuz 'bout a year or so ago, *I* would certainly have said, "what
>the hell is 'ey'?", esp. if it was used in a gender specific way referring to
>one individual like: "did you see ey's bike??". I might not have done that
>with zie/zir.
Uh-uh. "I was talking to my lover they other day and ey said that I was
cute". Most people's brain, in my experience, would read that without a
hitch and belive whatever they wanted to believe. Probably think it's a
typo.
The form you were talking about would be, "Did you see eir bike??".
Andrew Beyer
<pax...@my-dejanews.com> wrote:
> without seeing if it's A) sensible and B) inclusive. This is 1999. Let's
> get with the program and finally realize that there are other people out
> there who are not x-actly like you who deserve respect, attention and, where
> necessary or requested, their own bloody pronouns.
What good is a pronoun if everyone decides they need their own?
--
Andrew Beyer
<bey...@rpi.edu>
Maevele S.A. Straw
Cameron wrote:
> zir third really great essay on language and gender>>
<prompting my first public:>
**SWOON**
(I have this thing about language and gender)
Very well said.
(applauds from floor)
--
Maevele
Steve Glover
Beyer <bey...@rpi.edu> writes
>What good is a pronoun if everyone decides they need their own?
Come on, you've heard of *personal* pronouns...
Steve
--
Steve Glover
Adam C. Wick
> mind and my sex life do for fun while they're gone?
Be totally virtuous? =)
Adam, not believing *THAT* for a second
Adam C. Wick
> [physics stuff]
> [english stuff]
*SWOON*
Someone with a background in physics *and* linguistics.
I think I'm in love.
Adam
Adam C. Wick
(yeah, yeah, two replies. Shoot me)
> believe). Whether or not it's possible to travel _strictly
> faster_ than c (ie, velocity always greater than c) depends
> on whether the universe has a problem with imaginary mass
I'm not even sure that's true. I do remember someone
telling me that certain particles are *known* to travel
strictly faster than light, although they don't last
very long. If you were to consider tunneling to be
superluminal travel, then we're done regardless; it
seems a lot of quantum-level theory depends largely
on your perspective of it. [especially considering
the question of what quantum results _mean_; is the
Copenhagen Hypothesis correct (i.e., properties of
sub-atomic particles do not exist), or is the splitting
universe theory correct (i.e., every time a property
comes into a question, the universe "splits" into nearly
identical universes which each contain exactly one of
all possible values of that property), or are we just
walking down the wrong path?]
> As to whether "it's not possible to add new pronouns to
> English": that depends, as C E M Joad would have said, on
Regardless, you can add whatever you want to English as
long as you convince enough people. Bill Shakespeare, for
example, added a number of words to English as a matter
of course. I even heard that the allmighty powers that
be at Websters have put their stamp of approval on
"gaydar".
> pronouns have varied quite a lot. Even synchronically,
> usage variations between, say, Mercian, Northumbrian and
> West Saxon were quite profound. Certainly pronominal
Not to mention the phonological and syntactic differences
between English, Scottish, Welsh, Canadian, U.S. Eastern,
U.S. Midwestern, U.S. Southern and U.S. Western. One could
easily predict that in a few hundred years (provide we
don't all die in the near future) the languages will have
split enough to become seperate languages in their own
right; much as French, Italian, Spanish, etc. split from
Latin.
> forms have been lost from English, in the sense that the case
> structure has simplified greatly over time.
The case structure of English has never been that complicated,
although I'll agree with you.
> that uses them. And are they "not English"?
Depends largely on who you ask. Or where, really. Personally,
I would say no ... its simple a dialect of English.
> what doesn't, doesn't. Read Jonathan Swift inveighing against
> dreadful new words like "mob", whisper "O tempora, o mores",
More compelling, I think, is Twain's essay on how he though
English should really work / be spelled. Unfortunately I
forget the title. Anyone?
ObBi: .... oh forget it. I can't think of one.
Adam
Adam C. Wick
> > get with the program and finally realize that there are other people out
> > there who are not x-actly like you who deserve respect, attention and, where
> > necessary or requested, their own bloody pronouns.
>
Thats not really the point. If I decide I want to use the
word "foo" to be my second-person plural pronoun, that
doesn't mean that "foo" has become part of standard English.
However, if (for some reason) I say "foo" and many, many
other people accept the word "foo" and (more importantly)
know what it means, then it becomes part of the language.
Or, more easily (but probably less correct), if "Foo" were
to become popular enough it would be added to Websters (or
whatever your favorite dictionary is) and thus become a
part of the language.
Once a language stops being changed, its dead. And dead
languages may be interesting, but they're not really that
practical.
Adam
Adam C. Wick
ObCrossThreadJoke: But can she leap tall butches in a single bound?
> Some folk, myself included, don't like that and find it unfair.
True. *shrug* Its especially amusing (in that sad way we all know
and love) that this assumption persists even as male birthrates
drop signifigantly.
> be. Transgendered, transsexual, bi-gendered, gender-blending, non-operative
> trans folk sometimes live in a gray zone that the language doesn't reflect,
> and that can get on yer nerves.
True, although it is entirely an English thing. Some languages
(Latin is the only one popping in my head) does have a neutral
gender to it that is recognizably different. English has "it",
but thats about it. (No pun intended)
> Let's assume that you're a female (of which there's many different
> varieties-- simply having XX genes or a vagina does NOT
> necess. make you a
Entirely depends on your point of view. Technically, you are
female - period, end of story. The differentiation comes when
the mind and body disagree over gender, or if some disorder
makes things _effectively_ different. Whether you consider
that ... then things get a little wierd.
Personally, I think life would be eased simply by building
a new language without the boolean influence that exists in
most modern languages and jamming it down everyone's throat.
Or if you have to keep two-valued logic in the general psyche,
at least get the 'or' right. Sheesh.
> > (i thought jozhi was a guy?)
>
> Well, why do you think I go by Cameron?? Or Cammy. Or Cam. Or Ronnie. Or
> Ron. Or C. Or Camm. Or Ronn.....
Adam, whose name cannot be multiply-gender-identified,
unfortunately.
Andrew Beyer
C. Wick) wrote:
I certainly wasn't saying that pronouns can't be added to the
language...I'm very much a follower of the 'living language' camp. I just
was pointing out that the idea of a pronoun for every noun defeats one of
the purposes of pronouns, which is to have something to use in place of
the noun.
--
Andrew Beyer
<bey...@rpi.edu>
Jozhi
>between English, Scottish, Welsh, Canadian, U.S. Eastern,
>U.S. Midwestern, U.S. Southern and U.S. Western. One could
>easily predict that in a few hundred years (provide we
>don't all die in the near future) the languages will have
>split enough to become seperate languages in their own
>right; much as French, Italian, Spanish, etc. split from
>Latin.
I don't know. I think that if you were to predict that that you'd be wrong.
They didn't have the Internet and TV and radio back then. Those three powers
are like, great equalizers. They allow everyone to add to this giant pool of
English and also to draw from it. So everything is always updated pretty well.
Heck, even accents seem to be at an all time low (within the United States
anyway). The strongest accent I can think of (for a whole group of people) is
Southern US. And there are a few stereotypes circulating about the
intelligence level and access to these three powers that Southerners have.
(i'm kidding about the last point!)
jozhi, revitalizing his interest in learning Lojban and Esperanto. any
esperantists in the crowd?
Jozhi
>languages may be interesting, but they're not really that
>practical.
Dead languages are also unpossible if they're being used. Latin is no longer
spoken (by nations of people). English is.
Jozhi
>pronouns for everything when you're not sure what else to use. HE, HIS
or
>HIM is kind of the English default setting in our language.
it's been a long while since i've read an article in a magazine that they used
he, his, or him as the default. "....if the reader will continue, she will
find that...."
>We speak of
>"mankind", "fireMAN", "postMAN" or even "snowMAN".
We speak of "the lunch LADY", "LADYbug". A LADY's slipper (the flower). Why
does it have to be a *lady's* slipper? Tell me men don't wear slippers.
Because that's the way the language evolved. When they named the flower only
women wore slippers (the kind you might wear with a gown). It's sexist, I
agree. But probably not as much as most ultra-feminists think. The challenge
is to try and change that. That's going to take time but can be done.
Remember, I think it's safe to say that there are *billions* of people out
there who don't care if their language is sexist. Personally I don't like the
-person suffix. Fireperson, snowperson.
-jozhi, realizing that even the word sexist is outdated. shouldn't it be
genderist?
Jozhi
>a new language without the boolean influence that exists in
>most modern languages and jamming it down everyone's throat.
esperanto! it was *made* to fit that description and it has a couple million
speakers now. but....i don't think it was made to be gender/sex
indiscriminate. i don't know actually.
serene_rebel
Nope, especially since I've (*cautious bounce*) maybe Met Someone
(tm).
serene
--
I am learning that there's beauty in pain, in longing,
in the quiet knowledge that the world is sometimes
too achingly beautiful for me to take in, and yet
encompasses me in that beauty.
~~~ http://members.tripod.com/~serene_rebel ~~~
serene_rebel
Jozhi wrote:
> jozhi, revitalizing his interest in learning Lojban and Esperanto. any
> esperantists in the crowd?
Jes, mi lernas ILo. (Yes, I'm learning Esperanto.) Currently
seeking penpals with no attachment to being answered in a timely
fashion. *smile*
serene_rebel
Jozhi wrote:
> jozhi, revitalizing his interest in learning Lojban
What's Lojban?
serene_rebel
Jozhi wrote:
>
>
> esperanto! it was *made* to fit that [non-boolean] description and it has a couple million
> speakers now. but....i don't think it was made to be gender/sex
> indiscriminate. i don't know actually.
There's a movement within the Esperanto community to bring the
language to gender neutrality, and from what I've seen, it's
working. I suspect this is due to the relative lack of
entrenchment of ideas of linguistic rectitude in Esperanto speakers.
Keleigh
I speak of humankind, firefighters, mail carriers, and... well, in SoCal I
just never have an occasion to worry about that last one...
Keleigh!
--
--
http://home.att.net/~hobbesian/home.htm
602348 on ICQ; "bekkilover" on AOL IM
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
"You two always had a way of making each other idiotically happy. Trip out!"
Cameron <pax...@my-dejanews.com> wrote in message
news:7f8734$gob$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com...
> In article <19990416033850...@ng29.aol.com>,
> jo...@aol.commentator (Jozhi) wrote:
>
> > what's the fuss over zie/zir anyway? who cares if you use a gender
specific
> > word?
>
> I cant speak for everyone, but for starters, I don't like to use male
> pronouns for everything when you're not sure what else to use. HE, HIS or
> HIM is kind of the English default setting in our language. We speak of
> "mankind", "fireMAN", "postMAN" or even "snowMAN". We refer to a bunch of
> folk, mixed sex, male or even a gaggle of women as "guys". Do you have
> children?? babies are almost ALWAYS assumed to be male, unless they're
> dressed up in some sort of frilly pink sequinted thingie, or-- feh!!--
have
> one of those obnoxious headbands on (I swear, THAT'S what they were
invented
> for-- a little billboard to the world: MY CHILD IS A BIO-FEMME, THANK
YOU!!
>
> Some folk, myself included, don't like that and find it unfair.
>
> However, I think it's coming more into the language (certainly mine) as
more
> and more people find that gender isn't as pink and blue as we expect it to
> be. Transgendered, transsexual, bi-gendered, gender-blending,
non-operative
> trans folk sometimes live in a gray zone that the language doesn't
reflect,
> and that can get on yer nerves.
>
> Let's assume that you're a female (of which there's many different
> varieties-- simply having XX genes or a vagina does NOT necess. make you a
> woman!!) Let's further assume you were a bit "butch". How would you feel
> "just correcting" everyone who called you Sir or Mr?? "Thank you, sir..."
in
> the grocery store at the checkout. "Can I help you, sir?" at the fast
food
> counter. If you don't really FEEL like a "sir", "Mr", he/him, it can
REALLY
> get on yer nerves!!
>
> If you don't KNOW any trans/bi/blending folk, then I can understand why
you
> would wonder who would even CARE. Still, it's out there (THEY'RE out
there),
> and I think it's high time we all got fair about our language.
>
>
> > (i thought jozhi was a guy?)
>
> Well, why do you think I go by Cameron?? Or Cammy. Or Cam. Or Ronnie.
Or
> Ron. Or C. Or Camm. Or Ronn.....
>
Mandy
private conversation on this group. What is zie/zir?
Mandy
Adam C. Wick wrote:
> > [Note to any alt.poly-ites who might be reading this: I finally
> > succumbed to the zie/zir protocol. So much easier than writing
> > his/her/he/she throughout. *grin*]
>
> Allright, for those of us who've browsed a.p but are
> not really members, how does zie/zir decline? =) Is
> it basically:
>
> (Nom) Zie caught the ball.
> (Gen) Zie's ball was red.
> (Abl) Ann was given the ball by zir.
> (Acc) Ann kissed zir
> (Dat) I gave the ball to zir.
>
> Adam, syntax freak
Susan Davis
>
> Are we allowed to co-opt another NG's *swoon* twice in one
> message? Hope so. *thud* (My other current favorite is
> soc.singles.mod's "Marry me?" *grin*)
Y'know, I've found myself swooning at things all over the net
lately, and I'm not sure whether it's such a good idea that I
am. I rather *like* having distinct cultures in each newsgroup;
it makes Usenet that much more interesting. I don't drink toasts
*crash* in swlab, I don't go on about t-shirt drawers in
alt.callahans, and I leave nutella references out of alt.poly;
perhaps I ought to not be swooning so much in other groups?
Or can cross-pollination between groups help foster a sense of
community without destroying each group's uniqueness? Bi poly
geek women tend to be the same people across several newsgroups,
for example....
-- Sue --
(To newsgroups with distinctive cultures! *CRASH*)
--
Susan Davis <s...@secant.com>
Secant Technologies * 4853 Galaxy Pkwy, Ste. S * Cleveland, OH 44128
the fluffKitten
serene...@usa.net wrote:
> "Adam C. Wick" wrote:
> > > Cool. My mind and your sex life are in Florida? What shall your
> > > mind and my sex life do for fun while they're gone?
> > Be totally virtuous? =)
> > Adam, not believing *THAT* for a second
>
> Nope, especially since I've (*cautious bounce*) maybe Met Someone
> (tm).
Hmmm, good luck. <big grin>
Andi, as single as ever.
--
____
Andrea Merrell \ _/__
feral fluffKitten \/ /
\/
Robin Lee Powell
>serene_rebel wrote:
>>
>> Are we allowed to co-opt another NG's *swoon* twice in one
>> message? Hope so. *thud* (My other current favorite is
>> soc.singles.mod's "Marry me?" *grin*)
>
>Y'know, I've found myself swooning at things all over the net
>lately, and I'm not sure whether it's such a good idea that I
>am. I rather *like* having distinct cultures in each newsgroup;
>it makes Usenet that much more interesting. I don't drink toasts
>*crash* in swlab
swlab?
Steve Glover
writes
>Or can cross-pollination between groups help foster a sense of
>community without destroying each group's uniqueness?
Indeed -- on the other hand, sometimes the 'cross-pollination' is
actually something that underlies both groups.
...it may be worth taking a look at the 'fannish accent' thread on
rec.arts.sf.fandom.
Basically, it would appear that people exposed to one of the elective
subcultures (fandom, RPGers, some kinds of geekery) see various things
as special to THAT elective subculture, when it could be that it's
something they all have in common due to things like reading skills
outpacing hearing/speech (how many of us, for example, spend large
chunks of our childhood saying things like "Oh, *that's* how you say
it"?) which then leads to interesting differences in facial/body
language and treatment of social cues.
Which, of course, can lead off into how we detect 'people like us' for
many different sorts of values of 'us'.
Steve, having just discovered he'll be helping run a bar in Cambridge
the weekend of Bicon, dammit
--
Steve Glover
Steve Glover
dejanews.com> writes
>> 1) It's not possible to add new pronouns to English.
>
>rubbish. We can do anything we ruddy well LIKE in English (and other
>languages), that's the wonderful thing about it. We can add whatever we
>like. If 10 million people started using the word "glub" or "whammi" to mean
>gender neutral reference to a person in place of the proper noun, guess
>what?? IT'S A PRONOUN!! Think of slang which is constantly coming into the
>language and being documented into dictionaries. These words are certainly
>not impossible to add to the language. It's more likely that we typically DO
>NOT CHOOSE to add pronouns to the language. To say that it's IMPOSSIBLE is
>just foolish. It may not be widely accepted, it may never make it into the
>APA or MLA style manual, but to say it's impossible... HA!
Exactly -- English is *lots* more like FORTH than it is like C
Steve, French on the other hand...
--
Steve Glover
Jeliza Patterson
Jozhi <jo...@aol.commentator> wrote:
>you know, it occured to me.
>
>what's the fuss over zie/zir anyway? who cares if you use a gender specific
>wrong gender? i'm thinking most people would correct you and then move on.
>and as for writing, put his xor her and move on.
I've been known to use zie/zir, in the following cases:
. to hide a person's gender as part of cloaking zir identity.
. when gender is irrelevant, and specify one or the other would be distracting
. when referring to a person who does not identify as male or female.
In general, when I want a gender-nuetral singular pronoun. Yes, I know
historically "their" has been used that way, but it really sounds wrong to
me still. And it doesn't satisfactorily answer for the third case above.
Jeliza
--
Do what thou wilt is the whole of the law,
but there is always chaos to consider.
valk...@cmu.edu http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~valkyrie/
the art gallery was updated 3/31/1999
Jeliza Patterson
Cameron <pax...@my-dejanews.com> wrote:
>Let's assume that you're a female (of which there's many different
>varieties-- simply having XX genes or a vagina does NOT necess. make you a
>woman!!) Let's further assume you were a bit "butch". How would you feel
>"just correcting" everyone who called you Sir or Mr?? "Thank you, sir..." in
>the grocery store at the checkout. "Can I help you, sir?" at the fast food
>counter. If you don't really FEEL like a "sir", "Mr", he/him, it can REALLY
>get on yer nerves!!
>
I really dig it when people call me sir, and I never correct people. They do
usually realize I'm female on second look, and sometimes apologize, but I
don't find it insulting one bit.
I do *not* feel included by the use of "he" as a generic pronoun, though.
Susan Davis
> Jozhi wrote:
>
> > any esperantists in the crowd?
>
> Jes, mi lernas ILo. (Yes, I'm learning Esperanto.) Currently
> seeking penpals with no attachment to being answered in a timely
> fashion. *smile*
Mi kredas ke devus esti plu ke tri ambauxseksemaj esperantistoj
je la reto....
-- Sue --
(whose E-o is *very* rusty these days)
Adam C. Wick
> (tm).
Congratulations, good luck, etc. etc.
Adam, happy for serene and yet a wee bit jealous =J
Adam C. Wick
> I don't know. I think that if you were to predict that that you'd be wrong.
> They didn't have the Internet and TV and radio back then. Those three powers
True.
> are like, great equalizers. They allow everyone to add to this giant pool of
> English and also to draw from it. So everything is always updated pretty well.
We still have a fairly large division between American (inclusive of
Canada) and British (inclusive of Scotland, Wales, England) English.
I do remember calling a b&b in northern scotland for a reservation
and being almost totally unable to communicate with the owner.
> The strongest accent I can think of (for a whole group of people) is
> Southern US. And there are a few stereotypes circulating about
It still takes me a sentence or two to bring back my New Englander
Translation Module. About half that for my Minnesotan Translation
Module. Unfortunately I have enough family in both places that I
have to do this fairly regularly =I.
> jozhi, revitalizing his interest in learning Lojban and Esperanto. any
> esperantists in the crowd?
I looked at it once. It seems my mental-block on learning languages
extends to Esperanto. =)
Adam
Susan Davis
>
> I've (*cautious bounce*) maybe Met Someone (tm).
Woo hoo! That ought to be bounce-worthy, if not swoon-worthy....
-- Sue --
(who's feeling bouncy herself after her weekend....)
Adam C. Wick
> speakers now. but....i don't think it was made to be gender/sex
> indiscriminate. i don't know actually.
Actually, I was thinking of the book "The Dispossessed" when I
wrote this =) But I don't know ... esperanto might work. I don't
know enough about it to make an informed opinion, though.
Adam
Adam C. Wick
> private conversation on this group. What is zie/zir?
Briefly, they're replacements for third-person singular pronouns in
English (which are gendered). I.e.:
He/She threw the ball ==> Zie threw the ball
Its actually pretty much nonsense, but what did you expect? This
is soc.bi =)
Adam
pricer...@my-dejanews.com
aw...@acm.org (Adam C. Wick) wrote:
> Actually, I was thinking of the book "The Dispossessed" when I
> wrote this =) But I don't know ... esperanto might work. I don't
> know enough about it to make an informed opinion, though.
Interesting: it was because of having recently read _The Dispossessed_ (at
least in part), that I learned Esperanto, back in 1976 (I had known the name
since the early 60's, but never bothered to learn it, despite an interest in
languages generally). Of course the language of the Odonian colonists on
Anarres in TD has no direct relationship to Esperanto, but "Lanti" (eugene
Adam), the found of "Sennacieca Asocio Tutmonda" and the "midwife" of the
Plena vortaro and the Plena Ilustrita Vortaro was definitely in the tradition
of the anarchists like Bakunin, Emma Goldman, Paul Goodman, et al, that forms
the background for LeGuin's book (see also her "The Ones Who Walked Away from
Omelas" and "The Day Before the Revolution" (I may have that last title
incorrect; it's about the death of Odo), and the notion of a politically and
ethnically netural language has affinities.
George
Jeliza Patterson
<pricer...@my-dejanews.com> wrote:
>the background for LeGuin's book (see also her "The Ones Who Walked Away from
>Omelas" and "The Day Before the Revolution" (I may have that last title
>incorrect; it's about the death of Odo), and the notion of a politically and
>ethnically netural language has affinities.
That's the right title; I just reread that story recently.
I haven't actually read the disposessed yet, and I'm not sure why, since
I tend to read anything by Le Guin that I can get my hands on. I'm been
concentrating on her shorts lately, though: _Four Ways to Forgiveness_ and
_A Fisherman of the Inland Sea_ and _Orsinian Tales_. And I just finished
the GenderFlex anthology, but that's a rather different collection (and not
a Le Guin one, either.) Gotta love Circlet Press. :)
Jeliza
--
valk...@cmu.edu http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~valkyrie/
People are more violently opposed to fur than leather becauase
it's easier to harass rich women than motorcycle gangs. (Northern Sun)
Cameron
jel...@cs.cmu.edu (Jeliza Patterson) wrote:
> In general, when I want a gender-nuetral singular pronoun. Yes, I know
> historically "their" has been used that way, but it really sounds wrong to
> me still.
...and doesn't "their" often imply plurality??
Sometimes it just sounds really, REALLY akward, for example: "Have you seen
Jeliza's new car?? Their just bought it at that new dealer that opened up..."
Whoo!! >:P
Of all the ones bouncing 'round, I'm tending to like zie/zir the best. And
thanx to all mah cyberfriends who are bothering to refer to *me* as "zie/zir."
I appreciate the effort!! <:}
---Camm
Schillermeister
>We still have a fairly large division between American (inclusive of
>Canada) and British (inclusive of Scotland, Wales, England) English.
<shakes head> Adam, Adam, Adam...*if* you pass the following test I
won't ask you to rephrase that sentence.
Identify the following: eavestrough, loonie, chesterfield, Saskatoon
berry, quonset hut, tuque, reeve, Premier, voyageur, Metis, barasway,
allophone, Timbit, Governor-General, tourtiere, screech, poutine,
fricko, scuddy, smelt, heater, Victoria Day, Cancon, RRSP.
For bonus points, pronounce the following: lieutenant, Quebec,
Toronto, Calgary, schedule, the letter z.
Craig, Canadian imperialist
Schillermeister
Lee Powell) wrote:
>swlab?
Craig, or something to that effect :-)
Schillermeister
(Schillermeister) wrote:
>Identify the following: eavestrough, loonie, chesterfield, Saskatoon
>berry, quonset hut, tuque, reeve, Premier, voyageur, Metis, barasway,
>allophone, Timbit, Governor-General, tourtiere, screech, poutine,
>fricko, scuddy, smelt, heater, Victoria Day, Cancon, RRSP.
I forgot one: Dominion.
Craig, Statscan, Revcan, CRTC...
Geezer
> In article <371A834B...@secant.com>, Susan Davis <s...@secant.com>
> writes
> >Or can cross-pollination between groups help foster a sense of
> >community without destroying each group's uniqueness?
>
> Indeed -- on the other hand, sometimes the 'cross-pollination' is
> actually something that underlies both groups.
At a recent poly-con we had a discussion about crossing over, how
there are different groups that people count themselves part of,
and how the similarities between the groups - interests, tastes,
tolerances or *swoon*s - serve as a bit of home that we carry
with us to make it *our* place.
Personally, my preference is to think of it as different facets:
- learning
- work
- parenting
- family
- creative
- social
- support
> Basically, it would appear that people exposed to one of the elective
> subcultures (fandom, RPGers, some kinds of geekery) see various things
> as special to THAT elective subculture, when it could be that it's
> something they all have in common ...
Some people are interested in creating a definition for why *this*
place is different from *that* place. But for me, well I love eating
breakfast on the front porch, reading in bed, sleeping in front of the
fireplace. ObBi: I think the flexibility I have in enjoying a location
resonates with the flexibility I have in enjoying different people.
> Steve, having just discovered he'll be helping run a bar in Cambridge
> the weekend of Bicon, dammit
Drats! Even an untutored colonial like me knows that Cambridge is not
an outskirrts of Edinburgh. Sympathetic hugs, Steve, and I'll try not
to bounce too much that yrs truly will be going to Bicon in July!!!!!!
cheers, eh?
Geezer giza at selin dot com
Geezer
> Identify the following: ...
> fricko
hmmm, fricko?? /me is deficient in that area. Maybe one of
those words for snow. "Come in out of the fricko, Billy!" :-)
> For bonus points, pronounce the following: lieutenant, Quebec,
> Toronto, Calgary, schedule, the letter z.
Gloucester, eh?
And that favourite of linguists, The Canadian Raising.
Kay
cas...@spambegone.interlog.com (Schillermeister) wrote:
> On 19 Apr 1999 12:42:01 -0500, aw...@acm.org (Adam C. Wick) wrote:
> >We still have a fairly large division between American (inclusive of
> >Canada) and British (inclusive of Scotland, Wales, England) English.
> <shakes head> Adam, Adam, Adam...*if* you pass the following test I
> won't ask you to rephrase that sentence.
Now now, lads, don't squabble. Or I shall have to come over there
and sort you out... (thinks: "Tchah! colonials!")
Kay, with wicked grin and half a news service
Steve Glover
>> Steve, having just discovered he'll be helping run a bar in Cambridge
>> the weekend of Bicon, dammit
>
>Drats! Even an untutored colonial like me knows that Cambridge is not
>an outskirrts of Edinburgh. Sympathetic hugs, Steve, and I'll try not
>to bounce too much that yrs truly will be going to Bicon in July!!!!!!
Thanks... What makes it worse is that I *live* in Edinburgh, and the bar
I'll be tending is in New Hall, Cambridge.
Steve
--
Steve Glover
serene_rebel
Susan Davis wrote:
>
> serene_rebel wrote:
> >
> > Are we allowed to co-opt another NG's *swoon* twice in one
> > message? Hope so. *thud* (My other current favorite is
> > soc.singles.mod's "Marry me?" *grin*)
>
> Y'know, I've found myself swooning at things all over the net
> lately, and I'm not sure whether it's such a good idea that I
> am. I rather *like* having distinct cultures in each newsgroup;
> it makes Usenet that much more interesting. I don't drink toasts
> *crash* in swlab, I don't go on about t-shirt drawers in
> alt.callahans, and I leave nutella references out of alt.poly;
> perhaps I ought to not be swooning so much in other groups?
>
> Or can cross-pollination between groups help foster a sense of
> community without destroying each group's uniqueness? Bi poly
> geek women tend to be the same people across several newsgroups,
> for example....
>
> -- Sue --
> (To newsgroups with distinctive cultures! *CRASH*)
Hmm, good points, all, and at 2:30 in the morning, they even sound
good when they blur like that on the screen. *grin*
serene
--
I am learning that there's beauty in pain, in longing,
in the quiet knowledge that the world is sometimes
too achingly beautiful for me to take in, and yet
encompasses me in that beauty.
~~~ http://members.tripod.com/~serene_rebel ~~~
the fluffKitten
Kay <k...@vide.coventry.ac.uk> wrote:
> In article <371be3dd...@news.interlog.com>,
> cas...@spambegone.interlog.com (Schillermeister) wrote:
> > On 19 Apr 1999 12:42:01 -0500, aw...@acm.org (Adam C. Wick) wrote:
> > >We still have a fairly large division between American (inclusive of
> > >Canada) and British (inclusive of Scotland, Wales, England) English.
> > <shakes head> Adam, Adam, Adam...*if* you pass the following test I
> > won't ask you to rephrase that sentence.
> > Craig, Canadian imperialist
>
> Now now, lads, don't squabble. Or I shall have to come over there
> and sort you out... (thinks: "Tchah! colonials!")
Wrong damn colonies to. <well worn grumble>
>
> Kay, with wicked grin and half a news service
Dejanews does get useful doesn't it?
Andi, firmly of the opinion that newsservers are nasty rotten
eeeeeeeeeevilll heterosexual tools of the patriachy or
some other such wild overstatement.
--
____
Andrea Merrell \ _/__
feral fluffKitten \/ /
\/
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
serene_rebel
Mandy wrote:
>
> Huh? I always feel like I'm missing something or stumbling in on a
> private conversation on this group. What is zie/zir?
> Mandy
I've been gone for a couple of days, and I have 68 more messages
to get through, but if I don't see a cogent response to this
before I go to bed, I'll take the time to answer. I'm sure
someone's done it already, and I'm nearly unconscious.
Peace and yawns,
serene, who took 3 tries before spelling her name right just now
serene_rebel
the fluffKitten wrote:
>
> In article <3719AD2C...@usa.net>,
> serene...@usa.net wrote:
> > Nope, especially since I've (*cautious bounce*) maybe Met Someone
> > (tm).
>
> Hmmm, good luck. <big grin>
>
> Andi, as single as ever.
Thanks. Looks like this thing is gonna stay friends-who-flirt,
though. Ah, well, we're where we are because it's time for us to
be where we are, I guess. Wow, that's even incoherent to me. lol,
I really should get to bed. Tuck me in, anyone?
serene, single, too.
Alison Rowan
> Steve, having just discovered he'll be helping run a bar in Cambridge
> the weekend of Bicon, dammit
Bummer :-(
--
Purple Rabbits: also at http://www.hedonism.demon.co.uk/rabbits/
One day, you just have to decide to stop behaving like an 18 year old
and start enjoying the life you've got. Even if that means just doing
all the things you used to do but having a decent meal first. W.Ellis
Robin Lee Powell
>In article <7ffg6c$cfe$1...@goldenapple.srv.cs.cmu.edu>,
> jel...@cs.cmu.edu (Jeliza Patterson) wrote:
>
>> In general, when I want a gender-nuetral singular pronoun. Yes, I know
>> historically "their" has been used that way, but it really sounds wrong to
>> me still.
>
>...and doesn't "their" often imply plurality??
>
>Sometimes it just sounds really, REALLY akward, for example: "Have you seen
>Jeliza's new car?? Their just bought it at that new dealer that opened up..."
Wrong tense, for one thing. "They just bought it...".
I do see what you mean, though.
-Robin
--
My Home Page (Too Much Information!):http://www.csclub.uwaterloo.ca/~rlpowell/
"Government is not suggestion nor persuasion, it is force. When you advocate
any government action, you first must believe that violence is the best answer
to the question at hand." -- Laws of the Jungle, by Allen Thornton
Robin Lee Powell
>
>
>the fluffKitten wrote:
>>
>> In article <3719AD2C...@usa.net>,
>> serene...@usa.net wrote:
>
>> > Nope, especially since I've (*cautious bounce*) maybe Met Someone
>> > (tm).
>>
>> Hmmm, good luck. <big grin>
>>
>> Andi, as single as ever.
>
>Thanks. Looks like this thing is gonna stay friends-who-flirt,
>though. Ah, well, we're where we are because it's time for us to
>be where we are, I guess. Wow, that's even incoherent to me. lol,
>I really should get to bed. Tuck me in, anyone?
<tuck, tuck, cuddle, kiss goodnight> I'm not very good with bedtime
stories, though.
-Robin, 4-5 hours sleep, exam in 2.
Robin Lee Powell
Woohoo! A place where my gender-neutral name can come in handy!
-Robin, who actually _met_ a male Robyn yesterday. Grrr.
Alison Rowan
> > esperanto! it was *made* to fit that description and it has a couple million
> > speakers now. but....i don't think it was made to be gender/sex
> > indiscriminate. i don't know actually.
>
> Actually, I was thinking of the book "The Dispossessed" when I
> wrote this =) But I don't know ... esperanto might work. I don't
> know enough about it to make an informed opinion, though.
Esperanto is much less gender neutral than English, for a rant about
the language, including a bit about how sexist it is, see my mate
Justin's essay at http://www.xibalba.demon.co.uk/jbr/ranto.html
The Disspossessed is one of my three favourite books ever, is an
almost exact description of my politics to boot. It's a shame the
stated bisexuality is never truly visible, but this is a flaw that
leGuin fixes in recent books, especially Fisherman of the Inland Sea.
Alison Rowan
> On 19 Apr 1999 12:42:01 -0500, aw...@acm.org (Adam C. Wick) wrote:
>
> >We still have a fairly large division between American (inclusive of
> >Canada) and British (inclusive of Scotland, Wales, England) English.
>
> <shakes head> Adam, Adam, Adam...*if* you pass the following test I
> won't ask you to rephrase that sentence.
>
> Identify the following: eavestrough, loonie, chesterfield, Saskatoon
> berry, quonset hut, tuque, reeve, Premier, voyageur, Metis, barasway,
> allophone, Timbit, Governor-General, tourtiere, screech, poutine,
> fricko, scuddy, smelt, heater, Victoria Day, Cancon, RRSP.
And from the other side, try outwith, hoon, havering, radge, skank,
ween...
pricer...@my-dejanews.com
Alison Rowan <rab...@hedonism.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> Esperanto is much less gender neutral than English, for a rant about
> the language, including a bit about how sexist it is, see my mate
> Justin's essay at http://www.xibalba.demon.co.uk/jbr/ranto.html
Justin has some intelligent things to say in his "ranto"; but perhaps
_because_ it is a rant, there are also a lot of personal opinions and
not-precisely-mainstream-linguistic takes on things in it, unfortunately
difficult for someone who doesn't know much linguistics to disentagle from
the "good part". Does he mention "riismo" at all in it? I haven't looked at
it for a while. I strongly question the statement that E-o is "much less" g.
n. than English, even without "ri". Just as a very simple example, E-o from
its inception in the somewhat-less-than-completely-enlightened 1970's had the
word "homo" ("human person") as contrasted with "viro" ("male human"), while
normal English usage referred to Man-with-a-capital-M.
serene_rebel
Susan Davis wrote:
>
> serene_rebel wrote:
> > Jozhi wrote:
> >
> > > any esperantists in the crowd?
> >
> > Jes, mi lernas ILo. (Yes, I'm learning Esperanto.) Currently
> > seeking penpals with no attachment to being answered in a timely
> > fashion. *smile*
>
> Mi kredas ke devus esti plu ke tri ambauxseksemaj esperantistoj
> je la reto....
>
> -- Sue --
> (whose E-o is *very* rusty these days)
>
Well, I'm still at the
reading-grammar-lessons-and-using-the-glossary-to-translate stage,
so you're like a native speaker compared to me.
serene
ObBi: I mentioned the woman I'm "seeing" online to another friend,
and she got kinda concerned. "Serene, I didn't know you were
so... ummm... serious about this." "About what? Women?" "Yes."
"LOL, well, no more serious about them than I am about men." *grin*
serene_rebel
"Adam C. Wick" wrote:
>
> > Nope, especially since I've (*cautious bounce*) maybe Met Someone
> > (tm).
>
> Congratulations, good luck, etc. etc.
>
> Adam, happy for serene and yet a wee bit jealous =J
Nah, save your jealousy. *grin* Looks like I'm still single, but
after 9 months as part of a "couple," it's kinda nice to be able
to flirt with someone and not feel the need to report back. *grin*
I'm having fun.
serene
serene_rebel
Susan Davis wrote:
>
> serene_rebel wrote:
> >
> > I've (*cautious bounce*) maybe Met Someone (tm).
>
> Woo hoo! That ought to be bounce-worthy, if not swoon-worthy....
>
> -- Sue --
> (who's feeling bouncy herself after her weekend....)
Oooh, tell! Tell! Please-oh-please-oh-please....
serene_rebel
Robin Lee Powell wrote:
>
> serene...@usa.net wrote:
<snip>
Tuck me in, anyone?
>
> <tuck, tuck, cuddle, kiss goodnight> I'm not very good with bedtime
> stories, though.
Ooh, thanks, Robin. *kiss*
>
> -Robin, 4-5 hours sleep, exam in 2.
How'd it go?
Robin Lee Powell
>
>
>Robin Lee Powell wrote:
>>
>> serene...@usa.net wrote:
><snip>
>Tuck me in, anyone?
>>
>> <tuck, tuck, cuddle, kiss goodnight> I'm not very good with bedtime
>> stories, though.
>
>Ooh, thanks, Robin. *kiss*
<giggle> You keep doing that, I'll think you find me attractive or
something. :-)
>> -Robin, 4-5 hours sleep, exam in 2.
>
>How'd it go?
As well as it needed to. Not exceptionally, but good enough.
-Robin
serene_rebel
Robin Lee Powell wrote:
>
> serene...@usa.net wrote:
> >
> >
> >Robin Lee Powell wrote:
> >>
> >> serene...@usa.net wrote:
> ><snip>
> >Tuck me in, anyone?
> >>
> >> <tuck, tuck, cuddle, kiss goodnight> I'm not very good with bedtime
> >> stories, though.
> >
> >Ooh, thanks, Robin. *kiss*
>
> <giggle> You keep doing that, I'll think you find me attractive or
> something. :-)
And that's a bad thing? *grin*
JDJohnstone
Cameron wrote:
> . . .
>
> Let's assume that you're a female (of which there's many different
> varieties-- simply having XX genes or a vagina does NOT necess. make you a
> woman!!) Let's further assume you were a bit "butch". How would you feel
> "just correcting" everyone who called you Sir or Mr?? "Thank you, sir..." in
> the grocery store at the checkout. "Can I help you, sir?" at the fast food
> counter. If you don't really FEEL like a "sir", "Mr", he/him, it can REALLY
> get on yer nerves!!
. . .
Okay my first post and couldn't resist this one :-)\
My job sent me to German form the US this Fall and I played a mental game coming
back on the plane. How many hours would it take for the flight attendant to quit
calling me sir? Not thin and my hair was midlength-ambiguous, and wearing a loose
jacket. It took her about 5 hours to work that one out.
So maybe its a warped sense of humor but I find it fun ?-)
JJ
Schillermeister
Lee Powell) wrote:
>-Robin, who actually _met_ a male Robyn yesterday. Grrr.
Never heard of Robyn Hitchcock?
Craig, just wondering
Schillermeister
>hmmm, fricko?? /me is deficient in that area. Maybe one of
>those words for snow. "Come in out of the fricko, Billy!" :-)
I'm going to blow out a part of Adam's test here, but since you asked
I'll reveal that "fricko" is a type of stew.
>> For bonus points, pronounce the following: lieutenant, Quebec,
>> Toronto, Calgary, schedule, the letter z.
>Gloucester, eh?
Do you mean to suggest that Gloucester is pronounced differently
elsewhere? If so, I was unaware of the distinction.
>And that favourite of linguists, The Canadian Raising.
<grin> Good one.
More for the test crowd, after due consultation with Ani: credit
union, Socred, blochead, Grit, college, baby bonus, davenport,
separate school, b&e, 365, OAC, hoser.
Identify.
Craig, Canucklehead
Susan Davis
> >
> > -- Sue --
> > (who's feeling bouncy herself after her weekend....)
>
> Oooh, tell! Tell! Please-oh-please-oh-please....
I got to spend *all* of it with my dearest love. :-) :-) :-)
(Well, we were at least ostensibly working for most of it, but
research is so much nicer snuggled up next to your sweetie....)
-- Sue --
(*still* feeling bouncy, even after her rotten day today)
--
Susan Davis <s...@secant.com>
Secant Technologies * 4853 Galaxy Pkwy, Ste. S * Cleveland, OH 44128
Kay
> Kay <k...@vide.coventry.ac.uk> wrote:
> > Now now, lads, don't squabble. Or I shall have to come over there
> > and sort you out... (thinks: "Tchah! colonials!")
> Wrong damn colonies to. <well worn grumble>
*grin* Well, when I've sorted out bilocation, I'll sort you
out at the same time, OK?
> > Kay, with wicked grin and half a news service
> Dejanews does get useful doesn't it?
A positive lifesaver. Bless whoever thought of it (and sux to people
who don't offer open NNTP - if everyone did it, the "too much load"
argument would vanish).
> Andi, firmly of the opinion that newsservers are nasty rotten
> eeeeeeeeeevilll heterosexual tools of the patriachy or
> some other such wild overstatement.
Actually, it's admidiocy rather than serveritis this time. Servers
at least you can hack or replace with a better one <sigh>.
Kay, blowing kisses Ozwards.
Kay
> > [english stuff]
> *SWOON*
> Someone with a background in physics *and* linguistics.
> I think I'm in love.
*grin* I have a life devoted to knowing about things.
A regular Elephant's Child, that's me.
Kay, and you should see what I can do with my trunk...
Kay
Let's not even go anywhere around "cocking and aiming".
[I wrote:]
> > believe). Whether or not it's possible to travel _strictly
> > faster_ than c (ie, velocity always greater than c) depends
> > on whether the universe has a problem with imaginary mass
> I'm not even sure that's true.
Assuming the formula for relativistic mass is correct, it
certainly is true: pop in the numbers, crank the formula,
and out pops an imaginary mass. All you need is for v to be
greater than c: (c - v) is therefore < 0, and sqrt(c - v) is
imaginary. Of course, I have not the faintest what an imaginary
mass would be like, but...
> I do remember someone
> telling me that certain particles are *known* to travel
> strictly faster than light, although they don't last
> very long.
Real (as opposed to virtual, yes) particles like that are
usually known as tachyons (from the Greek tachys, meaning
swift). These are of course conceptually real, because as I
said nobody's seen them yet, if they do exist. So your someone
doesn't have it quite correct (or my keeping-up with physics
has some catching up to do, and I'm pretty sure I'd have
heard of something as momentous as tachyons turning up).
> If you were to consider tunneling to be
> superluminal travel, then we're done regardless;
I think it's more 'time-less' than superluminal.
[Copenhagen vs Everett-Wheeler models trimmed]
Wergh. Here we hit notions of 'meaningfulness'. I'm
OK with a physics that preserves coherency and consistency,
but I'm not troubled by non-resemblance to 'common sense'.
I suppose, when it comes to it, if the maths is OK, I'm
happy to let the philosophers trouble over whether the
consequences it gives are cool or not.
Oh, let's get back to Everett-Wheeler anyway, since people
_will_ talk about it. The problem is essentially that one
can't tell whether E-W is the correct model. It's coherent
and consistent, but since there's no way (that I know of,
anyone fancying the Nobel for physics is welcome to provide
one) to observe any difference between an E-W and a nonE-W
cosmos (from _within_, of course), it's a point that really
can only be left up to the philosophers and skiffy writers.
> > As to whether "it's not possible to add new pronouns to
> > English": that depends, as C E M Joad would have said, on
> Regardless, you can add whatever you want to English as
> long as you convince enough people. Bill Shakespeare, for
> example, added a number of words to English as a matter
> of course.
By which you mean that WS was the first writer of record
for the words. We have no way of knowing whether they were
used prior to his writing, of course - he wasn't in the
habit of footnoting with "I just invented the verbal use
of 'incarnadine'".
However, the original point concerned pronouns: and these are
much more 'structural' than vocabular words. As such one would
expect them to be (a) fewer and (b) more strongly conserved, and
this is indeed what we find. Nouns and adjectives get verbed all
the time, and so forth; and this is where I think the majority
of Shakesperean innovations were.
Secondly, while Shakespeare is the writer customarily used as
the example of this, Tudor English as a whole was in a great
ferment of novelty. Consider Lyly and the group of writers who
became known as the Euphuists (Lyly being satirised as Holofernes
by Shakespeare).
> I even heard that the allmighty powers that
> be at Websters have put their stamp of approval on
> "gaydar".
*chuckle* I didn't think lexicographers were in the business
of dispensing approbation any more.
> > pronouns have varied quite a lot. Even synchronically,
> > usage variations between, say, Mercian, Northumbrian and
> > West Saxon were quite profound. Certainly pronominal
> Not to mention the phonological and syntactic differences
> between English, Scottish, Welsh, Canadian, U.S. Eastern,
> U.S. Midwestern, U.S. Southern and U.S. Western.
Oh, indeed.
> One could
> easily predict that in a few hundred years (provide we
> don't all die in the near future) the languages will have
> split enough to become seperate languages in their own
> right; much as French, Italian, Spanish, etc. split from
> Latin.
Hm. However, there are new cohering factors (economics,
politics, cultural dispersion, technology) that may counter
that trend either partially or completely. If there is one
thing we may be sure of, it is that languages will continue
to develop in interesting ways as long as there are cultures
to use them.
> > forms have been lost from English, in the sense that the case
> > structure has simplified greatly over time.
> The case structure of English has never been that complicated,
> although I'll agree with you.
In comparison with Finnish or Sanskrit, I agree; but one can't
avoid noticing, when learning Anglo-Saxon or even Middle English,
that the case forms are important; far more so than in Modern
English, where prepositions do most of the dirty work.
> > that uses them. And are they "not English"?
> Depends largely on who you ask. Or where, really. Personally,
> I would say no ... its simple a dialect of English.
When does a dialect become a separate language? I've been
reading up on creolisation recently; you might find some of
the issues there inform your thinking about that question.
> > what doesn't, doesn't. Read Jonathan Swift inveighing against
> > dreadful new words like "mob", whisper "O tempora, o mores",
> More compelling, I think, is Twain's essay on how he though
> English should really work / be spelled. Unfortunately I
> forget the title. Anyone?
Typical: I cite an English author, you an American :) No, I
don't know the essay, but if you find the title, I'll hunt it up.
> ObBi: .... oh forget it. I can't think of one.
*chuckle* alt.usage.english was invented by bisexuals. Truly.
And... um... if E-W is true, there exists at least one universe
in which everyone is bisexual *runs and hides*.
Kay
Geezer
> On Tue, 20 Apr 1999 04:11:49 GMT, Geezer <gi...@selin.com> wrote:
> >Gloucester, eh?
>
> Do you mean to suggest that Gloucester is pronounced differently
> elsewhere? If so, I was unaware of the distinction.
A friend from B.C. pronounced it "Glue Sester", and in Ottawa
when someone is travelling from Parliament Hill to the West
End and says of their trip, "I saw Glue Sester today!" it's
frightening mainly for the fact that the place is 20km in the
opposite direction.
To be honest, I have found pronunciation of place names to be
incredibly localized. How to identify oneself as "Not-From-Here"
"Outaouais"
"Kapuskasing"
"Mattawa"
"Quyon"
Geezer, eh? as local as the day is long.
Geezer
> Now now, lads, don't squabble. Or I shall have to come over there
> and sort you out... (thinks: "Tchah! colonials!")
Oh, please, please, please!
> Kay, with wicked grin and half a news service
Geezer, who would feel much more sorted if Kay did come over
Kelly Carpenter
rlpo...@calum.csclub.uwaterloo.ca (Robin Lee Powell) wrote:
> serene...@usa.net wrote:
> >
> >
> >Robin Lee Powell wrote:
> >>
> >> serene...@usa.net wrote:
> ><snip>
> >Tuck me in, anyone?
> >>
> >> <tuck, tuck, cuddle, kiss goodnight> I'm not very good with bedtime
> >> stories, though.
> >
> >Ooh, thanks, Robin. *kiss*
>
> <giggle> You keep doing that, I'll think you find me attractive or
> something. :-)
>
Poor Robin, he's got flirts aimed at him from every direction. I'm
green-eyed with envy.
No, wait, I'm always green-eyed.
Kelly, who _must_go to bed soon
--
Don't despair -- your ideal lover is waiting for you around the corner.
Kelly Carpenter
"Sorted" or "sordid"?
Kelly
Cameron
rlpo...@calum.csclub.uwaterloo.ca (Robin Lee Powell) wrote:
> Woohoo! A place where my gender-neutral name can come in handy!
Hmmmmm... >;)
---C.
the fluffKitten
<libragirl-210...@209-122-211-115.s115.tnt5.ftw.pa.dialup.rcn.com>,
libr...@erols.com (Kelly Carpenter) wrote:
> In article <371D489D...@selin.com>, Geezer <gi...@selin.com> wrot
> > > Now now, lads, don't squabble. Or I shall have to come over there
> > > and sort you out... (thinks: "Tchah! colonials!")
> > Oh, please, please, please!
> > > Kay, with wicked grin and half a news service
> > Geezer, who would feel much more sorted if Kay did come over
>
> "Sorted" or "sordid"?
Suppose it would all depend on what was going to be more fun.
Andi, trying to sort out which sordid act is most fun.
--
____
Andrea Merrell \ _/__
feral fluffKitten \/ /
\/
serene rebel
Susan Davis wrote:
>
> serene_rebel wrote:
> > >
> > > -- Sue --
> > > (who's feeling bouncy herself after her weekend....)
> >
> > Oooh, tell! Tell! Please-oh-please-oh-please....
>
> I got to spend *all* of it with my dearest love. :-) :-) :-)
Oh, that's fantastic! Congrats!
> (Well, we were at least ostensibly working for most of it, but
> research is so much nicer snuggled up next to your sweetie....)
There may be stuff that ISN'T much nicer snuggled up next to your
sweetie, but I can't think of anything offhand. *smile*
>
> -- Sue --
> (*still* feeling bouncy, even after her rotten day today)
>
So glad. Wanna talk about the rotten day?
serene, listening ears on